going to decide next week. specifically thoel specifically, though, in terms of how judges make their decisions, is she allowed to take into consideration the length of time that he was sentenced for this week? is she essentially allowed to pass a little bit of judgement on what judge ellis did tonight and factor that in to what she gives manafort next week? no, not necessarily, but she can decide whether it is concurrent or consecutive. judge ellis was looking at the case just before him, final fraud, failure to declare foreign bank accounts and tax she s going to look at a very different case. she knows a lot about this case, too, because of the hearings that she s had to hold to have fact finding on his failure to cooperate in the breach of that cooperation agreement. so she s looking at a very different case, and so, no, i don t think she should be considering what judge ellis did in this case, but i do think she can decide that ten years is an appropriate sentence in her case
sentence? was he involved with collusion with anybody else in russia who wasn t a government official? also, why bring that up? and why is that the most important thing? i think most important, what you saw today, is that the most important thing? not only was manafort not charged with anything have to do with rush ssia in this case, th was the trial judge ellis banned any discussion of russia collusion at all in his courtroom. so nobody could have tried to prove anything like that against manafort in this trial in virginia. no collusion, no collusion public arguments from the manafort defense team we ve been seeing increasingly from them in public filings and today in the courthouse steps as manafort has come to the end of the rope, these arguments are absolutely outside the four corners so why do they keep bringing that up and why would that be the most important part about this case where the judge ruled that that could never be discussed in this
circumstances with guilty plea and botched cooperation deal and she s the judge that revoked his bail in the first place so he had to serve time in jail while he was awaiting trial in the first place. there is a whole different narrative that goes into explaining what judge jackson will decide next week. specifically, though, in terms of how judges make their decisions, is she allowed to take into consideration the length of time that he was sentenced for this week? is she essentially allowed to pass judgment and factor that in? not necessarily but she can decide whether that s concur rent or consecutive. judge ellis was looking at the case before him that involved financial fraud, bank fraud and tax counts and that s his case. she s going to look at a very different case as you mentioned that involves obstruction of justice, the failed cooperation agreement. she knows a lot about this case, too, because of the hearings that she s had to hold to have fact-finding on his failure to
jurors on the other eight counts. there did not seem to be any difference in the amount of evidence put forward on the ten counts where the juror held out versus the eight counts where the juror went along. nevertheless, that s how it went. juries are juries. they can do what they want. paul manafort came out of that trial lucky guy with eight felony convictions to his name. when a jury can t come to an unanimous decision, that s called a hung jury. so he got a hung jury on the ten felony counts where there was a hung jury, the prosecutors from mueller s office, they initially reserved the right to try paul manafort again for those ten charges. you can do that in the case of a hung jury. it s very interesting to me, and i ve never quite understood the strategy behind this. mueller s prosecutors initially reserved the right to bring manafort up on those ten charges where he had the hung jury again, if they decided they wanted to, but they never went through with that decision. they neve
potential other cases against other people, that was also a signal from the special counsel s office that there was no way they would be relying on paul manafort as any kind of witness against anyone. once you re telling the judge one way this guy repeatedly lies even to prosecutors who he supposed to be helping, that makes him useless as a potential witness against anyone else in any other case. and you ll remember during manafort s trial in virginia, the judge there, the famously judge, he basically yelled at the prosecutors in court, right? it was this big dramatic moment in court and hearing before the trial started, the judge said in open court you don t really care about mr. manafort s bank fraud, you can give information that would reflect on mr. trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment. you don t care about manafort. you re using him to get his